By Alan
Caruba
Despite
the growing worldwide recognition that global warming—now called climate
change—is a hoax and that the Earth has been in a cooling cycle going on
seventeen years, those most responsible for it continue to put forth baseless “science”
about it.
The
hoax has its base in the United Nations which is home to the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and got its start with the Kyoto Protocol in
1997 that went into force in 2005. It limits “greenhouse gas” emissions,
primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). It purports that the gases are warming the
Earth and many nations signed on to reduce them. The U.S. did not and in 2011
Canada withdrew from it. Europe is suffering economically from the billions it
invested in “alternative energy” sources, wind and solar power.
Five
years ago, emails between a group of the United Kingdom’s University of East
Anglia scientists and others who were generating computer models that “proved”
global warming were revealed. It was quickly dubbed “climategate” for the way
the emails demonstrated the manipulation of data claiming that global warming
was real. They had good reason to be worried, given the natural cooling cycle
the Earth has entered, but of even greater concern was the potential loss of
enormous amounts of money they were receiving for their deception.
To
date, not one of theirs and other computer models “proving” global warming have
been accurate.
On
Wednesday, March 10, The Wall Street Journal published an article, “Scientists
Say Four New Gases Threaten the Ozone.” It
reported on the latest effort of “scientists” at the United Kingdom’s
University of East Anglia and it is no coincidence that the university was the
center for the original IPCC data created to introduce and maintain the global
warming hoax.
“Traces
of four previously undetected man-made gases have been discovered in the
atmosphere, where they are endangering Earth’s protective ozone layer, a team
of scientists from six countries reported Sunday.”
Trace gases are those that represent less than 1% in the Earth's atmosphere. CO2, for example, represents a meager 0.038% of the atmosphere and represents no impact whatever on the Earth’s climate. It is, however, vital to all life on Earth as it is the "food" for all of its vegetation.
Trace gases are those that represent less than 1% in the Earth's atmosphere. CO2, for example, represents a meager 0.038% of the atmosphere and represents no impact whatever on the Earth’s climate. It is, however, vital to all life on Earth as it is the "food" for all of its vegetation.
“The
gases are of the sort that are banned or being phased out under a global treaty
to safeguard the high altitude blanket of ozone that protects the planet from
dangerous ultraviolet radiation, experts said.” These “experts” failed to
mention that everywhere above the Earth’s active volcanoes the ozone is
naturally affected by their massive natural discharge of various gases. The
oceans routinely absorb and discharge CO2 to maintain a balance. The bans
included the gas used primarily in air conditioners and for refrigeration. It
has since been replaced.
Another
gas that was banned is a byproduct of chemicals called pyrethroids that “are
often used in household insecticides.” Banning insecticides is a great way of
reducing the Earth’s population as insects spread diseases and destroy
property. Ironically, termites produce massive amounts of carbon dioxide.
The
means used to detect the gases included comparing “the atmosphere today to old
air trapped in annual layers of Greenland snow” and they also studied “air
collected by high altitude research aircraft and by sensors aboard routine
passenger jet flights around the world.” Not mentioned is the fact that the
Earth has had higher amounts of CO2 in earlier times which posed no threat to
it, so a few trace gases hardly represent a “threat.”
This
kind of questionable “science” was practiced by one of the most well-known of
the East Anglia scientists, an American scientist named Michael Mann, who used
tree ring data to prove a massive, sudden increase in CO2 in his “hockey stick”
graph that has since been debunked by skeptical scientists.
Mann
has brought a libel law suit against columnist Mark Steyn, the National Review
and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, charging defamation. Such suits cost
a lot of money and Robert Tracinski, writing in Real Clear Politics in February
noted that “it’s interesting that no one asks who is going to go bankrupt
funding Mann’s lawsuit. Who is insuring Mann against this loss?”
Tracinski
pointed out that “It is libel to maliciously fabricate facts about someone” but
that it is “legal for me, for example, to say that Michael Mann is a liar, if I
don’t believe his erroneous scientific conclusions are the product of honest
error. It is also legal for me to say that he is a coward and a liar, for
hiding behind libel laws in an attempt to suppress criticism.” The East Anglia
emails revealed that they were doing whatever they could to suppress the publication
of studies that disputed global warming in various science journals.
How
specious is this latest announcement about trace gases that they assert are a
threat to the ozone layer? An atmospheric chemist, Johannes Laube of the East
Anglia group making the announcement, was quoted as saying “We are not able to
pinpoint any sources” for the trace gases. “We are not able to point a finger.”
The
objective of the announcement is the same as the creation of the entire global
warming hoax. It provides the basis for the transfer of funds between developed
and undeveloped nations and would grant greater power to the United Nations to
reduce the world’s manufacturing base while endangering and controlling the
lives of everyone on Earth.
Is
the latest “research” a lie? The data it cites has some basis in fact, but
those facts are an excuse, like those cited about greenhouse gases, to frighten
nations into wasting billions on climate threats that do not exist. The real
threats remain climate events over which mankind never has and never will have
any control.
©
Alan Caruba, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment